G
GemmaRose
Guest
Why even bother answering her posts. She knows nothing and seems to be quite proud of advertising her ignorance.
- Status
V
VociMike
Guest
Are you offering to educate them (us?)? That would be the charitable thing to do, wouldn’t it?
S
SeekerJen
Guest
Um…wow. This seems really uncalled for.
B
Brownginger
Guest
EasterJoy, Hymns are not suitable for Mass! Mass properly consists of prayers for that particular day; so the argument about which hymns are better or whether a MD should go with his favorite Protestant song writer or this number-one-on-the-charts P&W number is irrelevant actually. When the good bishops decide that their flock can actually accept that and that their souls will be better for the decision, the Liturgy will actually be Liturgy!
SeekerJen, Jesus was speaking to people to whom the concept of eating His Body and drinking His Blood was totally unbelievable. He was referring to the metaphorical connection between food for the body and food for the soul. Perhaps the translation should read “the food I give…”
I have never liked the word “bread” used in the Mass after the Consecration. Maybe it belongs there and I am all wet; but there is no more bread on the altar after the Consecration. Just the accidents, the appearance. It is entirely wrong (IMO) to test the faith of those present at Mass to use the word “bread,” especially when so many who attend these days have no belief in the Transubstantiation.
SeekerJen, Jesus was speaking to people to whom the concept of eating His Body and drinking His Blood was totally unbelievable. He was referring to the metaphorical connection between food for the body and food for the soul. Perhaps the translation should read “the food I give…”
I have never liked the word “bread” used in the Mass after the Consecration. Maybe it belongs there and I am all wet; but there is no more bread on the altar after the Consecration. Just the accidents, the appearance. It is entirely wrong (IMO) to test the faith of those present at Mass to use the word “bread,” especially when so many who attend these days have no belief in the Transubstantiation.
B
benedictgal
Guest
If they really read those documents, they wouldn’t be shoveling out half of what they are publishing. Furthermore, they wouldn’t be writing music for the parts of the Mass that pretty much paraphrases the words.
Why would the Fathers of the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist have made the statement regarding the problems with music used at Youth Masses? If the publishing houses had taken the documents to heart, none of that would have been said by the Fathers.
The problem is that music for the Mass is not an anything goes. Horrid experimentation happened immediately after the Council. The music watered down Doctrine and took the Joan Baez/Carpenters approach to lyrics and style.
S
SeekerJen
Guest
It still has the physical appearance and accidents of bread and is indeed the Bread of Life. I don’t think Jesus made a mistake referring to Himself as the Bread of Life, and if you believe that the Eucharist truly is Jesus, then it IS the Bread of Life and thus it is correct to call it such. If you believe that He did make a mistake, that is something to take up with Him. Perhaps this is something on which you should consider submitting to the wisdom and teaching of Holy Mother Church, starting with St. Paul:
“The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.” -1 Corinthians 10:16-17 (NAB)
As so many of us are so often reminded, we are not to change the liturgy to suit our own tastes. You find the use of the word “bread” distasteful; apparently Christ, St. Paul, and the tradition of Holy Mother Church disagree.
G
GemmaRose
Guest
I would love to, and I have tried, on other posts. However there are many CAF posters who seem to have their eyes, ears, hearts and brains closed, and even more who present themselves as experts when in fact they have never provided music for a congregation in their life. (I have. Hundreds of times. Paid and volunteer.)
[Edited]
Excellent post.
B
Brownginger
Guest
SeekerJen, The quotes that you have cited refer to the bread before it has been consecrated. Jesus’ Body is nourishment, but it is not bread any longer! No matter who says it is bread, it is not bread after the Consecration! Saying so is heresy!
G
GemmaRose
Guest
:banghead:
M
MusicMan
Guest
I suppose the reason no one wanted to play my guessing game is because of the common view that Eucharistic Prayer II is an heretical prayer, written on the back of a cocktail napkin from a hotel in Switzerland in 1963, by an archbishop using texts from Hippolytus and Pontian, and any EP that isn’t the Roman Canon is simply Epic Fail.
So, I digress to the Roman Canon:
However, EP II does have the celebrant pray the following after the Memorial Acclamation:
So, I digress to the Roman Canon:
This text is prayed by the celebrant immediately following the Memorial Acclamation, which means that the “bread” in question has already been consecrated.
However, EP II does have the celebrant pray the following after the Memorial Acclamation:
EP III does not make reference to bread in this fashion, however EP IV does:
Even more suspect is this line in Eucharistic Prayer for Reconciliation II:
Yikes! Bread? Meal? In the Eucharistic Prayers? When will the heresy stop!
B
benedictgal
Guest
Now, I can understand your vigilent defense; however, there are several Eucharistic Prayers that mention the term “bread” after the consecration.
Eucharistic Prayer II
Eucharistic Prayer IV
There is also the text of this ancient hymn from St. Thomas Aquinas that bears noting:
This comes from Laud Sion. We pray this every year during the Solemnity of the Body and Blood of the Lord. In fact, St. Thomas Aquinas wrote many of the hymns we sing during Benediction and during the Holy Thursday procession, such as Pange Lingua.
Therefore, even the Angelic Doctor uses the term bread. The Church, herself, also uses the term bread in the Memorial of the Eucharistic Prayers I quoted.
As I said, I can understand your valiant defense, especially when it comes to Sacred Music. There are actually some hymns, like “I Myself, am the Bread of Life” that are rather heretical. However, you need to look at the contextual use of the songs and read them as the Church reads them (the older ones).
Just to clarify: Marty Haugen is not Catholic. He is Lutheran. I guess that explains his shaky and questionable theology (Gather Us In; We Remember). Both of these songs are highly suspect, in my opinion, as are most of what is the OCP songbook, Spirit and Song. They may be based on the psalms, but, their style is not suitable for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
A
agapewolf
Guest
I did not say they belong at Mass. I said to not make it the same thing as a concert.
I write p/w music, and I’m not a “born again” evangielical. it is my prayer. It’s not from my “mind”. It is FROM THE PSALMS! GO read them.
You spouting off opinions like this is highly insulting.
B
Brownginger
Guest
The Eucharistic Banquet is indeed a meal. The food we eat once was bread – we take the bread, break it, and CONSECRATE it. It is no longer bread! The quotes everyone has posted try to illustrate what is done at Mass, the whole Mass. We share one loaf of bread – the bread that is thereafter consecrated, that has consecration performed on it! The quote used in the Mass after Consecration for whatever reason is there improperly. I know nothing about the charges that it was written on a napkin. I just know that we share the Body and Blood of Christ that once were bread and wine and which may properly compared with the bread and wine that we need for our bodily welfare since Jesus’ Body and Blood are necessary for our spiritual welfare. But never, ever, in any way anyone can here describe is the Holy Eucharist bread “cup” (meaning “wine”).
Try this example: we want a dress and shoes made for a dance. We take lace and leather to the tailor and we tell him that we want to use this lace and leather for our clothes. We tell him that we will be sharing the lace and leather with our friends and thus we will all be partaking of the same lace and leather. But after the tailor has sewn the materials, it is no longer lace and leather --it is dresses and shoes. We no longer refer to what is on our frame and feet as lace and leather: we say that we have dresses and shoes! Anyone would say we were wrong if we said we were wearing lace and leather! The lace is still there; the leather is still there. But they are different altogether! Not a perfect example because transubstantiation takes it to another universe. But you can see that the use of the word “bread” at Mass anytime after the Consecration is incorrect.
Try this example: we want a dress and shoes made for a dance. We take lace and leather to the tailor and we tell him that we want to use this lace and leather for our clothes. We tell him that we will be sharing the lace and leather with our friends and thus we will all be partaking of the same lace and leather. But after the tailor has sewn the materials, it is no longer lace and leather --it is dresses and shoes. We no longer refer to what is on our frame and feet as lace and leather: we say that we have dresses and shoes! Anyone would say we were wrong if we said we were wearing lace and leather! The lace is still there; the leather is still there. But they are different altogether! Not a perfect example because transubstantiation takes it to another universe. But you can see that the use of the word “bread” at Mass anytime after the Consecration is incorrect.
M
MusicMan
Guest
The translations of EP I, II, IV, and Reconciliation II are correct as presented. You are in error. Plain and simple.
A
agapewolf
Guest
First of all, not one person here, as far as I have read is arguing about the fact that the Eucharist is what it is. It seems that everyone one this thread agrees with you. Do you see that? We undersatand, completely, that the bread and wine become the Body and blood. What we are trying to say, is that the terminology can be referred to differently because even the PARTS OF THE MASS do so. Therefore, songs that quote the scriptures and the Roman missal word for word are NOT heretical, but are indeed in line with church teaching and are not false. You are sitting here saying that Roman missal was composed on a napkin? THAT is wrong.
2nd of all, your example is incorrect. What you have described is an accidental change. That is not what happens to the Eucharist. The Eucharist is a substantial change. It is actually a dress starts out as lace and leather, stays a dress, but is now made out of silk and rubber. that way the accidents stay the same (bread and wine), but the substance changes.
B
Brownginger
Guest
agapewolf, Notice I said that my example was not totally applicable. Also note that I was not the one who brought up the napkin reference. The term “Bread of life” is quite consistent with my argument, since it is a synonym for the Body of Christ. But “Bread” by itself is incorrect, since it refers to the what existed prior to the Consecration. I know that most everyone posting here realizes that we do not eat bread. That is just it: we do not eat bread!
Nothing personal about your talent and your musical work. The songs you write just aren’t appropriate for Mass, Psalms or not! The prayers that should be sung at Mass are written by those who decide what the Mass prayers should be – set to music! Go ahead and do that and no one should have a problem with your art at Mass as long as the tune is liturgically appropriate.
Nothing personal about your talent and your musical work. The songs you write just aren’t appropriate for Mass, Psalms or not! The prayers that should be sung at Mass are written by those who decide what the Mass prayers should be – set to music! Go ahead and do that and no one should have a problem with your art at Mass as long as the tune is liturgically appropriate.
P
pnewton
Guest
My answer to this, should I ever be asked, is to affirm the truth in it and show where the Church and my diocese holds this in the highest esteem and incorporates it as the primary source of music in cathedral Masses and all main Masses. After all, the quotes are that the Church holds Gregorian chant in highest esteem, not each parish must use chant primarily. I would then help such a one to participate in the diocesan choir, if they desired. In addition, I would offer to help them in any way to assemble a choir for Gregorian chant and offer them as many Masses as they could handle.
As to the original poster, his opinions ought to weigh with any music director when he makes them known. There are always some that take complaining to a new art form, but as a rule, the music director should be responsive to those in the parish, within guidelines allowed by the liturgy.
B
benedictgal
Guest
Agapewolf and I don’t normally agree on many things; however, he is correct on this one. Brownginger, even the Memorial Acclamation uses the word “bread”:
These words come directly from St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians. In fact, we read this particular passage on Holy Thursday.
Furthermore, even some of the older, venerable hymns that the Church sings for Communion contain the word “bread”. Take Shepherd of Souls, for instance:
This song is found in many of the traditional Catholic hymnals. In fact, it dates back to 1825, a bit younger than St. Thomas’ works, but, the general idea is still the same.
Incidentally, Brownginger, your analogy doesn’t quite work, especially if you are an avid QVC viewer like me (my biggest vice
). Believe me, they do make a big deal when they are selling a lamb leather jacket for a low price and on easy pay! They do talk about the stitching, but, its still lamb leather. They even make a point of stressing the leather on the shoes, too. Yes, I’ve fallen for the pitch many, many times, especially when they stress that something is genuine leather or genuine Italian gold.
B
Brownginger
Guest
Benedictgal, They may speak of the leather, just as we speak of the finest wine used at Mass. Anyway, it was just an attempt at an illustration – I’m no St. Patrick!
I have no problem with “living bread” or “heavenly wine” – as I said in an earlier post, it is the reference simply to “bread” and/or “wine” that is improper. I believe that the reference to breaking bread is right on, especially when the prayer asks the Lord to stay thereafter and set His table in our hearts. That describes the gifts before and after the Consecration.
I have no problem with “living bread” or “heavenly wine” – as I said in an earlier post, it is the reference simply to “bread” and/or “wine” that is improper. I believe that the reference to breaking bread is right on, especially when the prayer asks the Lord to stay thereafter and set His table in our hearts. That describes the gifts before and after the Consecration.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Oops. Better not tell the Pope that! This is what our Holy Father wrote in Sacramentum Caritatis, the full text of which can be found at the Vatican web site, (underline mine):
The bread come down from heaven
7. The first element of eucharistic faith is the mystery of God himself, trinitarian love. In Jesus’ dialogue with Nicodemus, we find an illuminating expression in this regard: “God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him” (Jn 3:16-17). These words show the deepest source of God’s gift. In the Eucharist Jesus does not give us a “thing,” but himself; he offers his own body and pours out his own blood. He thus gives us the totality of his life and reveals the ultimate origin of this love. He is the eternal Son, given to us by the Father. In the Gospel we hear how Jesus, after feeding the crowds by multiplying the loaves and fishes, says to those who had followed him to the synagogue of Capernaum: My Father gives you the true bread from heaven; for the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world" (Jn 6:32-33), "and even identifies himself, his own flesh and blood, with that bread: “I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh” (Jn 6:51). Jesus thus shows that he is the bread of life which the eternal Father gives to mankind.
The thing is that the Pope knows the difference between literal bread and retaining the word “bread” in a particular metaphor which refers to Christ Himself. We also call Our Lord the Good Shepherd, even though he doesn’t literally keep sheep, and the Lamb of God, even though he isn’t literally a wooly little animal, and so on.
Do you see what we’re getting at? The use of the bread metaphor is not heresy!
Do not get me wrong. When I teach 2nd grade catechism, I am very picky about how the kids refer to the Blessed Sacrament. But saying that “the bread we break is a sharing in the Body of the Lord” is not heretical. It is Scriptural, and it absolutely does refer to the Blessed Sacrament.
- Status